I ran into someone this past week who would pose quite a dilemma for some, especially if we are trying to determine if people have eternal life based on what they believe. (NONE of us do that, do we?)
Anyway, I thought it was interesting, so I am throwing it out here for you to weigh in on…
It was a woman who called about some questions related to whether or not she had eternal life.
Asking the Kennedy Questions
As we talked, I asked her some diagnostic questions to help me determine where she was coming from.
I asked her that if she were to die tonight, if she were sure she would go to heaven. When she answered, “Yes” I asked her why. She said something along the lines that since Jesus died for all of her sins, and she has believed in Him, she gets to go to heaven when she dies. Though she could have been a bit clearer, this answer was initially satisfactory.
But I asked some follow-up questions as well, to see if she was in any way relying on her past, present, or future good works in order to earn, prove, or keep her eternal life. For example, I asked her if there was anything she could do in the future that might prevent her from going to heaven when she died. From her answers, she seemed certain that since she did nothing to earn her eternal life, there was noting she could do to lose it either. Though I am not the judge of her spiritual condition, I was once again satisfied with her answer. To the best of my knowledge, she understood that simply by her faith in Jesus, she had everlasting life which could not be lost.
Confused Christology
Then we started to talk about some of her questions, and in the process, she mentioned about how she knows Jesus is going to come again when He rises from the dead.
It was an odd way of phrasing it, and so I asked her what she meant. She stated that she knew Jesus died on the cross 2000 years ago for her sins, and that He was right now in heaven, and He was coming again in the future. I said, “That’s good, but what was it you said about Him rising from the dead?”
She said, “You know…when He comes again. He died, went to heaven, and when He comes again, He will rise from the dead.”
Wait… what?
Apparently, she didn’t know that Jesus had risen from the dead.
I talked a bit more with her about this, and as it turns out, somehow, here in America, she had never been told (or had just never understood) that Jesus had already risen from the dead!!! I didn’t even know this was possible, but I discovered she doesn’t read her Bible, and doesn’t go to a church that teaches the Bible much.
I asked her if she saw The Passion of the Christ, which she had. I asked, “Didn’t you wonder what was going on at the end of the movie when Jesus rose from the dead?” She said she didn’t think anything about it, because all it shows is Jesus with a glow around Him, and so she thought that was supposed to be Him in heaven, which matched her theology perfectly. (Go look at the end of the movie! She’s right. The ending is very vague.)
After taking her to some passages in the Gospels, and then to 1 Corinthians 15 (which Paul partly wrote to prove the resurrection has taken place), she said she now understood and believed that Jesus had already risen from the dead.
Did She Have Eternal Life?
So here is the question: Did she have eternal life prior to understanding and believing that Jesus rose from the dead? I say “Yes.” She was justified the moment she first believed in Jesus for everlasting life. I was able to disciple her some more this week and teach her some things about the Jesus she had believed in that she did not previously know.
However, even though I would say, “Yes, she had eternal life before she believed in the resurrection of Jesus,” there are lots of Christians who would probably say, “No.” They might argue that until she believed in the historical event of the resurrection of Jesus she does not have eternal life. Although she believed in her own sinfulness, the deity of Jesus, His death on the cross, and that she had eternal life in Him alone, she did not have eternal life until she believed the whole package. Even though she believed in a future resurrection of Jesus, this is not sufficient.
To me, this is incredulous. Antonio da Rosa has posed a similar situation as I have encountered here. He stated somewhere (I can’t find it now) that to consign someone like this woman to hell for not knowing all the Biblical facts about Jesus that are on a man-made list is the height of legalism. This woman believed in Jesus for eternal life, and by Jesus’ own promise, whosoever believes in Him, has everlasting life (John 3:16; 5:24; 6:47).
Note as well that on this account, the woman is just like all the disciples of Jesus. The disciples believed in Jesus for everlasting life, but not a single one believed that Jesus would die and rise from the dead until after He died and rose from the dead! Does this mean that none of them really had eternal life until after the resurrection of Jesus?
No, again, this is an example of one of those central doctrines of the Gospel which help a person believe in Jesus for eternal life, but are not required for a person to believe in order to receive eternal life. Don’t get me wrong, without the death and resurrection of Jesus, there is no Gospel. But one does not have to believe the entire Gospel in order to receive eternal life. Most of the Gospel message provides supporting facts and evidence for why and how Jesus can offer eternal life to anyone who believes in Him for it, and how to live in response.
But the single “message of life” in the Gospel is this: Whoever believes in Jesus has everlasting life (cf. John 3:16; 5:24; 6:47).
Does this help you in your evangelism and discipleship endeavors? Does it help clarify the Gospel message? What do you think about this lady who didn’t know Jesus had risen from the dead? Have you ever encountered someone like this?
Absolutely Saved!
Hey Jeremy,
I also wanted to say that those same people who wouldn’t think she were saved confuse the “who” with the “how.” If a young child believes in her father to provide food for her, but doesn’t understand what he does for a job in order to provide for it, she still trust in HIM for the food! She doesn’t have to understand the “how” in order to trust in the “who.” Maybe she just considers her father’s promise to provide food for her to be true because she knows “He’s daddy, and he can do anything.” Whatever motivates her to believe in Him, as long as she believes in Him for that food, no on in their right mind would deny her faith. Why is it that people do this with individuals like the one above? Her simple faith in Jesus brought her eternal life.
Tom
Tom,
Excellent analogy. I love it. Maybe you should rework/expand it into some sort of newsletter article and submit it to me at GES…
It would be easy to tear apart Tom’s analogy. The problem with those holding the traditional Free Grace position is not that they confuse the “who” with the “how” but that they arrive at their view from the Scripture rather than philosophy and man-made paradigms. — Greg
Greg,
First, all analogies are easy to tear apart. Even the ones Jesus and Paul use. That’s part of the nature of analogies.
Second, are you saying that anyone who claims to get their beliefs from Scripture must therefore be right? I don’t know anybody in “Christianity” who doesn’t claim that.
Third, who are these “Traditional Free Grace” people you refer to?
Finally, let’s get’s back on topic. Are you saying the woman I talked to does not have eternal life because she believed in some “philosophical Jesus”?
Jeremy
P.S. Are you “Greg S.”? If so, and if you choose to reply, please continue to keep your comments civil and concise. So far, you have done well here, but I have seen a “Greg S.” on some other blogs who got out of hand.
Tom,
800-1000 words.
Jeremy,
Thanks for the encouragement. How long do the newletter articles have to be? I’d love to expand on it.
Tom
Excellent post Jeremy!
My mom is 65 years old. She’s uneducated and she’s a very simple woman. If you were to ask her if she believes in Jesus as her Savior, she would say “absolutely yes!” Beyond that, she couldn’t tell you Paul from Peter.
I guess my question is “how much ‘correct’ theology do you have to have to be saved?” Are the Lordship people saved?
how much ‘correct’ theology do you have to have to be saved?”
John 6:40
40 For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
… thats it, beyond that, human speculation , legalism and judgementalism
take over. in oprder to accept the lordship position, you must disregard volumes of scripture
Are the Lordship people saved?
very likely, but who are we to make that judgement. although they may be right with some of their conclusions. there is no grace and no assurance with their theology. who with the lordship position can ever know that they have a personal relationship with christ and can stand on his promises of the certainty of salvation and eternal life. with lordship, we are but one sin away from negating the assurance jesus promises.
bob west
Bob,
Thanks for the comment. You are absolutely right on about the content and result of faith in Jesus, and you analysis of Lordship salvation is correct as well.
It seems strange to me that some people can criticize Lordship Salvation for having moral requirements to prove a person is saved, but then turn around and say there are certain ongoing doctrinal requirements.
I talked about this woman to a professor from DTS last week, and he told me that that while a person doesn’t have to know, understand, or believe in the resurrection (his own future resurrection or the past, historical resurrection of Jesus) to receive eternal life, if they reject that truth later when they are told about it, this proves they weren’t really “saved” in the first place.
I believe in John 3:16. I share the death and ressurection when I evangelize, but people can come to faith with out understanding or believing every truth in the N.T.
Trent,
Well put. Concise and clear. It looks like you all had effective and fruitful ministry in India!
All of the arguments may sound great, but they all fly in the face of Romans 10:9, “If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” If we follow what this verse says, then we see two conditions and one result:
1. We declare with our mouth, Jesus is Lord
2. We believe in our hearts that God has raised Him from the dead
The result: we will be saved.
It’s either true or it’s not–regardless of where we stand on it.
The earlier comment using John 6:40: this was spoken BEFORE the resurrection of Jesus, so talking about it at that point would have meant nothing to them. AFTER the resurrection it becomes central to every teaching found in Scripture–even retroactively. It is also central to the practice of baptism by immersion–“buried with Him by baptism unto death, raised to walk in newness of life.”
When it doubt, follow the Scriptures.
Hold on there, Rocky.
Follow the logic on Romans 10:9-15 a little more closely. Romans 10:14-15 lists the progression on how a person comes to call on the Lord to be saved. These verses list the progression in reverse order, so let’s list the progression in actual order:
1. A Preacher is Sent.
2. A Preacher Preaches.
3. People hear what is preached.
4. People believe what the hear (which according to Rom 10:10a results in righteousness/justification)
5. They call on Him in whom they have believed (which according to Rom 10:10b, 13 results in being saved.)
So clearly, righteousness/justification is different than being saved. The condition for the first is believing (faith alone), and the condition for the second is calling. Furthermore, Rom 10:14 is clear that one cannot call until after they have believed. But if believing results in justification (as Rom 4:4-5 and Rom 10:10a clearly show), then how could calling on the Lord and confessing with your mouth also result in justification since such a person is already justified by faith alone?
Regarding John 6:40, though this verse may have been spoken before the resurrection, but it was written after. If it has no bearing on how people receive eternal life, why would John bother to write it as a way to tell people how to receive eternal life (John 20:30-31)?
So without a doubt, follow the Scriptures.
Jeremy the answer is surprisingly easy. Jesus said whoever has the Son has life. Nothing else is required. Just need to work out what
Yes. So did she have life or did she not?